By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - What people dislike about Wii U hardware?

IcaroRibeiro said:
curl-6 said:

I didn't actually have a problem with the Wii U hardware.

It's power level wasn't a problem for me as I still thought games like Mario Kart 8 and Fast Racing Neo looked great, and I even didn't mind the Gamepad, as long as it wasn't being used in a stupid and detrimental way. (Looking at you Starfox Zero)

The thing to remember with the Wii U is that while it's easy to look back now and say "look at all these great games", at the time they were either a case of the right game at the wrong time, and/or their impact was diminished by the fact that they were rare oases in a vast, barren desert, as the Wii U lacked the third party support Switch enjoys to plug the gaps between big releases, leading to near constant agonizing droughts.

Honestly, this seems a pretty bad excuse. Some Wii U games were slightly improved on Switch, but they are largely the same game. From a outsider perspective looks like people only started to found them good because they like Switch and because they are selling well, people associate flop as a synonymous for bad quality, and the opposite holds true...

The games in question were generally well liked by both critics and those who bought them on Wii U, they didn't start to be viewed as good only after they landed on Switch. They just sold better there because they were tied to a much more appealing system with vastly better marketing, design, software, etc.



Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023.

Around the Network
IcaroRibeiro said:
curl-6 said:

I didn't actually have a problem with the Wii U hardware.

It's power level wasn't a problem for me as I still thought games like Mario Kart 8 and Fast Racing Neo looked great, and I even didn't mind the Gamepad, as long as it wasn't being used in a stupid and detrimental way. (Looking at you Starfox Zero)

The thing to remember with the Wii U is that while it's easy to look back now and say "look at all these great games", at the time they were either a case of the right game at the wrong time, and/or their impact was diminished by the fact that they were rare oases in a vast, barren desert, as the Wii U lacked the third party support Switch enjoys to plug the gaps between big releases, leading to near constant agonizing droughts.

Honestly, this seems a pretty bad excuse. Some Wii U games were slightly improved on Switch, but they are largely the same game. From a outsider perspective looks like people only started to found them good because they like Switch and because they are selling well, people associate flop as a synonymous for bad quality, and the opposite holds true...

I always see so many people on intenert shitting on MS first party during Xbone days and I can't believe they are that bad, people on this forum more likely just looked at the underwhelming sales and convinced themselves they were bad because they were not selling 

Nah. Dreamcast was a well made console with a great library. SEGA was just a badly run company and out of money. Saturn was similar to PS3 in it was powerful but difficult to get all the features out if it. Despite that, amazing console and library. Same with TG16. Wii U was shit hardware with some great games but not near the range of even Vita or DC. Vita had a lot of cult games and a great device minus the memory cards. Xbox One was less powerful than base PS4 but that was not a huge deal. The issue was the messaging,marketing and initial price. Then XBO never found that exclusive that was greatly reviewed and sold amazing. They tried some new IPs and either sold badly and/or got middling reviews. MS canceled some hyped games. MS was always playing catch up and never did. The hardware was fine and even got better than Sony. Wii U was just bad hardware in internal design and for developers. It was a poor user experience.

TG16 was big in Japan as PC Engine so it has massive library despite the system being far less powerful than Genesis/SNES

Saturn again big in Japan so a huge and great Japanese library.

Vita. A lot of cult indie and Japanese games.

Dreamcast. Cult console fans love and still getting games made and sold to this day even the recent 3D game Xenocider.

Those systems still have a lot of games still only on those platforms.

XBO, doesn't stand out. It has maybe a handful of unique games only on there. Wasn't bad just didn't really stand out.

Wii U a dozen or so great games all but a small select few on Switch now so Wii U just doesn't quite jump out the same way as a cult system. Just buy the better version Switch.

I don't think Wii U to Switch conversions run into the same issue Shenmue II from DC to Xbox. Sonic Adventure from DC to Gamecube, Ecco from DC to PS2 had. There are massive differences in those ports. Some argue it's worse on those other systems. Ecco is darker and less colorful. Shenmue II has missing transparencies and bad texture changes. Sonic Adventure everything is worse in the Gamecube version visually.

Then Wii U to Switch is. Mario Kart 8 now can hold 2 items. Battlemode fixed. Runs better. Mario 3D world runs better and includes a new part of the game with an Open World Mario game. Tokyo Mirage Sessions has a new dungeon. New costumes.

Point is. Other systems that failed and became cult hits. Wii U to me has none of the attributes that does that. Hardware sucked. The games are on Switch and are better versions. Almost no reason to ever play a Wii U again. Same for Xbox One. Still plenty of reason for retro games to pick up a Saturn or Dreamcast. PC Engine. Or ore recently a Vita.



Bite my shiny metal cockpit!

Eh? Some people are saying stuff about hardware internals and marketing, but those didn't really impact my opinion of the console. It was the fact that it didn't feel like it worked correctly and didn't feel like it had anything in the way of exciting software outside of Earthbound and Xenoblade Chronicles X.

1. Gamepad was kind of janky, it was supposed to double as a handheld, but the range was crap. It didn't even have enough range to cover an average house.
2. Really REALLY sluggish OS. It was a nightmare to navigate through it. Even after updates to speed it up it was fairly bad.
3. After Mario Kart 7 on 3DS, Mario Kart 8 felt like a step back. Mario Kart 8 Deluxe on the Switch was much better - portability plus 8 player multiplayer, and 12 if you have an internet connection.... not to mention all the extra content and features.
4. There weren't any must have games on the console, the best ones were just shovel-ports from PS3/Xbox360 like Assassin's Creed and Mass Effect.
5. Pretty much any game on the console was done better on another, the Gamepad added nothing.
6. The idea of the Gamepad, looking away from the TV screen, felt really intrusive and disorienting.
7. The asymmetrical gameplay wasn't fun. It was basically people with a Gamepad doing the fun part, and then people not having as much fun with the other controllers.

So basically, the Wii U was just a fat Wii for me, and sometimes I'd switch over and play Earthbound or Xenoblade Chronicles. The only game on Wii U at the beginning that didn't feel boring on the console was Trine 2.

The one thing I liked about the Wii U, featurewise, was the fact I could buy every game on the EShop.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

The crappy tablet thing that inflated the price. The ridiculously archaic online/account systems. The near complete lack of good games, there were a handful, definitely not enough to justify buying the thing though. Oh, and the name of course.

Last edited by Ka-pi96 - on 05 July 2021

Gamepad alone probably doubled the price of the thing.
If it had launched with a normal controller, they could have halved the price of the unit.
Resulting in much more sales overall (imo).

The gamepad was bulky, heavy, and not optimal to use (most people resorting to buying a pro controller for it, to game with).
And in the games were they really tried to take advantage of the gamepad, the games suffered for it.
(starfox comes to mind)

Anyways, bad sales caused Nintendo to pull developement early on, so there was game droughts, that just made the issue worse.
So it wasnt all just hardware's fault. It was a spiral of alot of things going wrong.

People that say it was just "marketing" are wrong however.
Nintendo brand is so big (so many loyal fans), that even with horrible marketing, if they put out a good device it will sell reguardless.
For people to not buy the Wii U, it was apparent that it wasnt a great product.

It came out, near the end of the gen, and was basically just upto par with the others on the market (that had been out for along time, and was soon moveing on). Soon PS4/XB1 launched, and that took alot of the hype away. At that point it was clear, the Wii U was old gen tech.

Hence another reason I think Nintendo purposefully launches their consoles, mid-gen, away from its competitors.
And why it changed its hardware to be differnt, so it would avoid direct compairsions.



Around the Network

Marketing and name killed it. The lack of software was a result of poor sales.

I liked how easy it was to backup files on WiiU. All that was taken away with the Switch lol

I also liked how you could play COD with a mate at home and just chat. One on screen and one on TV



 

 

The hardware. Its was sooo weak of a console. Wasn't a big jump from the wii or even xbox 360. Apart from that everything was great.



The Wii U's library is actually pretty good, if somewhat on the small side.

Pikmin 3, Super Mario 3d World, the Zelda HD remakes, Super Mario Maker, Mario Kart 8, Splatoon, Bayonetta 2, Xenoblade X, DKCTF, Smash 4, Hyrule Warriors, Yoshi's Wooly World, Rayman Legends, and much more. Many of these are genre defining and among the best games of their respective years. In 2014 the general consensus was that the Wii U actually had the best lineup of the HD systems since the PS4 and XB1 had such a disappointing year software-wise.

It took a while to get there though. The game drought of early 2013 really hurt the system right after launch and killed any momentum it might have had. Had Nintendo had games ready for release in those first 6 months of 2013 instead of relying on just Lego City and a remake of the Wii's Monster Hunter they could have done much better, but HD development was still very new for them.

The terrible marketing was an even bigger problem for Nintendo than the lack of games in 2013. They focused so much on the gamepad that the general public was confused as to whether it was a console or just a peripheral, and the gamepad lacked the immediate appeal and ease of understanding the Wiimote has.

The hardware was a problem in the sense that it was difficult for third parties to develop for and overpriced for what it was. The GPU was the best part and much better than what the 360 and PS3 had, and the system had about double the usable RAM. But the RAM was slow and the CPU was pathetic, both really bottlenecking the system. If the system had sold better third parties would have had more reason to put the effort into working around those bottlenecks, but with its poor sales there was no incentive to put in the extra work for games that wouldn't sell. The Wii U's specs also did not justify a $300-$350 price tag even though Nintendo was actually selling it at a loss. It seems that the gamepad and all its bells and whistles were what pushed the price so high, and that price never went down. A Wii 2 with the same specs and a focus on the Wiimote again would have been much cheaper and sold much better, Also, a system with better specs but no gamepad would have been easier to develop for, more worth the price, and also sold much better. In both cases the lack of the gamepad would have automatically improved the marketing by forcing Nintendo to focus on the console.

The gamepad itself is what doomed the system. Without it there would have been no confusion, the system could have been either cheaper or more powerful, the marketing would have been better by default, and it would have been able to capitalize on more of the Wii's market. The early 2013 drought may still have happened, but there likely would have been more third party games in that period under such a scenario like Rayman Legends, which was delayed to be released on other platforms when the Wii U started to fail.



dane007 said:

The hardware. Its was sooo weak of a console. Wasn't a big jump from the wii or even xbox 360. Apart from that everything was great.

It may not have been a big jump from the 360 but it was a big jump from the Wii. 

Wii was a 480p system with 88MB of RAM, a Direct X7 era GPU, and a single core 729MHz PowerPC750 CPU.

Wii U was a 720p system with 1GB of RAM, a Direct X10 equivalent GPU, and a triple core 1.24GHz PowerPC750 CPU.



Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023.

Gamepad should've been peripheral (with much better range), so that CPU/GPU/RAM can be much beefier.